Dave Beans

To break an agreement that was only agreed 8 months ago? I'd have thought that the govt would have foreseen these problems in the first place.

So they signed it knowing that they were going to break it, or they did no war gaming before they signed, then they went "oh, hang on".. Why didn't we just leave on WTO rules, if the deal was so terrible?

In a way, seeing as the UK govt had no plan, its not surprising to see that this Boris govt are in an unholy mess over this, however, it is also right to challenge certain aspects of the SM..."ah, its done this way, and we just have to accept it"...Well, why is it done that way? What are the alternatives? Being outside allows us to work out what these systems do, and come up with better ways for trade facilitation to work.. We also are going to have to think past this govt, and Brexit isn't going to end. So we going to have to learn how we adapt and move on, rather than regurgitating everything that has been said and done over the last five years..

....the path of least resistance would mean that nothing would change.. Walking a slightly different path means that you can look at a situation in a completely different way.. There is no reason, for instance, that those documents can't be digitised, and put through a Single Window (which will happen over time).. http://www.wcoomd.org/-/media/wco/public/global/pdf/topics/facilitation/instruments-and-tools/tools/single-window/compendium/swcompendiumvol1parti.pdf ...although, at the moment at least, its just another added non-tariff barrier hurdle to jump..

https://ec.europa.eu/food/animals/veterinary-border-control_en https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55887043 Just because its easy, it doesn't mean its a must. I thought we must stay in the single market at all costs, however, it seems that its rules like this, as well exploitation in several markets, including the haulage industry, has put me off slightly..

..there are major flaws.. Such as the requirement on having a veterinary inspection for a tin of Tuna..

Wouldn't that be a WTO breach? All third countries should be treated the same...

The French Govt don't pay Renault 'directly' to keep them there but they gave them state backed loans to 'help' them stay..

So that's a no then.. Its all academic anyway..

Does it pay anything into the central budget?

Norway doesn't "pay for access" per se... Each of the EEA states issue grants to EU states...They also pay to be part of each programme it signs up to.. https://eeagrants.org/about-us

It would cause port chaos.. perhaps not a good look..

It wouldn't look good for the EU though.. Would that be seen as a measurable response?